Why hasn't XP died yet
gamefreak
Veteran

Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,119
Location: Citrus County, Florida
Before Windows XP was released Windows 98 had held on to 8 years of support from Microsoft, between 1998 and July of 2006. Even as support for 98 was waning it was still a popular OS with people. However even when Microsoft finally closed the door on 9x support 98 only had 2 percent market share. Plus by 2004 and 2005 a lot of manufacturers stopped supporting software on 98. I was able to use Windows 98 til about 2008 when Mozilla Firefox, OpenOffice and most AV (Even free ones) stopped working on 98. My guesses to why 98 faded was because the computers running the OS were too slow and dying or it came down to software vendors discontinuing product support even just 6 years after 98 was released.
XP on the other had still has support for a majority of current applications. 12 year after it was released, which is something 98 was already struggling with in 2004. Why haven't the computers running XP died off in the way that older Microsoft OSe's have. Even as Microsoft axes support next year XP would be the 2nd most used OS.
Microsoft started a 10 year support life cycle with Win2K. However why has XP been given 13 years of support. My theories are the following-
Although XP was released in 2001 adaption was slow, most businesses didn't even start upgrading until late 2003- 2005. Some even holding on to 98 and 2000 systems until they died or couldn't meet requirements for business. Plus prior to late 2004 XP had major security holes, so in return MS started the 10 year support life-cycle in 2004 with Service Pack 2. You know to make it for the mess Windows XP was between 2001 and 2004.
Vista, The problem with Vista was some businesses may have upgraded to XP just over a year before Vista was released. However for people who have used XP since 01 the time period of over 5 years was just too much, so people got cozy with the OS so to speak as far as familiarity. Plus Vista being a major problem on top of that Microsoft was just doing whatever possible to keep customers happy. Then Netbooks and non state of the art hardware ran like s*** on Vista. So MS was allowing XP on Netbooks and low cost PC's as well of businesses.
Lack of support for Vista and a lesser extent 7. For like old printers and programs and what not.
It just works, I still have XP dual booted with Debian on a 2007 desktop with 3 GB of Ram because it works and I'm careful and have the computer protected.
It hasn't died out yet because my system hasn't crashed, and I see no reason to upgrade to 7. I see reasons against upgrading to 8, though.
Plus, I only use this system for internet access, and I know how to disable javascript, third-party cookies, and annoying plug-ins.
_________________
"To have friends, a man need only be good natured, but when one has no enemies there must be something mean about him." -- The Prince, Oscar Wilde
Not everyone has the RAM or video memory requirements or just don't like to see 2 gigs of their RAM go to making their desktop look pretty. XP is very reliable also. I had to move to Windows 7 because I had more memory than XP is used to and had to move on in order for it all to be actually used. Not everyone uses their computers as much as people around here might also. I've seen businesses that still run Windows 95/98 or lower. A computer only need be what you need it for.
gamefreak
Veteran

Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,119
Location: Citrus County, Florida
I still find XP useful myself, the question is why have other OSes that MS produced die quicker. Win 95 was a relic by 2005, same goes with 98 by 2008.
The way I see it is technology is so advanced (Ms made their best OS ever with XP.) is that why upgrade for some people. With upgrading from 9X people were upgrading from BSOD's and crashes, XP not so much. Also unless you have SSD and over 4 GB's XP still works.
XP on the other had still has support for a majority of current applications. 12 year after it was released, which is something 98 was already struggling with in 2004. Why haven't the computers running XP died off in the way that older Microsoft OSe's have. Even as Microsoft axes support next year XP would be the 2nd most used OS.
Microsoft started a 10 year support life cycle with Win2K. However why has XP been given 13 years of support. My theories are the following-
Although XP was released in 2001 adaption was slow, most businesses didn't even start upgrading until late 2003- 2005. Some even holding on to 98 and 2000 systems until they died or couldn't meet requirements for business. Plus prior to late 2004 XP had major security holes, so in return MS started the 10 year support life-cycle in 2004 with Service Pack 2. You know to make it for the mess Windows XP was between 2001 and 2004.
Vista, The problem with Vista was some businesses may have upgraded to XP just over a year before Vista was released. However for people who have used XP since 01 the time period of over 5 years was just too much, so people got cozy with the OS so to speak as far as familiarity. Plus Vista being a major problem on top of that Microsoft was just doing whatever possible to keep customers happy. Then Netbooks and non state of the art hardware ran like s*** on Vista. So MS was allowing XP on Netbooks and low cost PC's as well of businesses.
Lack of support for Vista and a lesser extent 7. For like old printers and programs and what not.
It just works, I still have XP dual booted with Debian on a 2007 desktop with 3 GB of Ram because it works and I'm careful and have the computer protected.
It hasn't died out yet because it's generally perceived as better than the later versions of windows. Windows Vista, Windows 7 and Windows 8 all hog a lot of memory compared to Windows XP and it's not necessary. It's all for new features that people don't necessarily want and it makes the performance crappy. I'd prefer newer specs on my computer to allow me to run more intensive programs on the computer (including games), not for those specs to be wasted on newer versions of an operating system.
That being said, I've stopped using Windows long ago.
Fogman
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,986
Location: Frå Nord Dakota til Vermont
Because when Vista started to come out in late 2006/early 2007, it was a very buggy system that introduced a lot of new and untried technologies. Vista, (and I might add subsequent Windows releases) made the OS much more complicated than it had to be, and with the complications, also cam higher system rescource overhead. WinXP actually ran better on P3/ P/4 Hardware than Vista and subsequent windows releases do on more more modern multi-core systems.
Many companies were reluctant to switch to Vista, and stayed with XP throughout the market cycle of Vista, and on into the market cycle of Win7 due to the fact that it still had lower system rescources.
Also, while Win7 was essentially a working version of Vista, it worked with even greater system overhead than Vista, to perform more or less much the same tasks as XP Pro.
Also another thing that I truly despised about Vista and later Windows systems is that MS got rid of the desktop FTP client, which was probably one of the most beautiful pieces software that MS developed, in my opinion.
_________________
When There's No There to get to, I'm so There!
I actually think the stuff to make my desktop pretty makes it look worse and slower. On windows 7 I actually turned off applying styles to windows and like it better.
If it isn't broken, don't fix it.
MS keeps making new OSes when they'd be better served to polish what already exists.
95 was beta for 98.
ME was a disaster and NT was bad.
2000 did well as a replacement for NT.
MS started from scratch to make XP for all applications. It was pretty solid and MS invested in debugging it extensively.
Vista was change for the sake of change and done poorly. Windows 7 was the polished version of Vista.
Windows 8 was change for the sake of change and largely useless on non-touchscreen devices.
MS does this for the sake of selling stuff, but people can't justify buying all new software and hardware that work well with the new OS. So, people with systems that work fine for them have no reason to upgrade...nor can they justify the cost.
Windows is its own competition. Besides, Windows XP is NT—no wonder aspies can’t understand it!
_________________
The red lake has been forgotten. A dust devil stuns you long enough to shroud forever those last shards of wisdom. The breeze rocking this forlorn wasteland whispers in your ears, “Não resta mais que uma sombra”.
I was told by a PC repair person it's because XP is a stable system and some people are reluctant to upgrade until they are sure the new system on offer is stable and good value. By pushing new OSs onto the market before they are ready and expecting customers to put up with teething troubles is counter-productive. Vista had a lot of problems, and W8 has had terrible publicity.
Also if people are short of money they will use hand-me-down PCs especially if their needs are simple word processing or surfing the internet.
MXH
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain
Despite Windows XP being used widely, Microsoft are ending support for it next year.
Windows XP end of support date
Basically this will force people to upgrade to Windows 7 or Windows 8, or just use competing products that don't bloat the system to hell, it's going to end up with a lot of old Pentium 3-era systems being binned by people who don't know they can still keep this old hardware going and/or rely on Windows, so Windows XP will soon be dead unless Microsoft realise that there are still many XP machines running without any issues.
_________________
Thanks Tinkerbell.
Allegedly away with the fairies for 6-7 years
Windows XP end of support date
Basically this will force people to upgrade to Windows 7 or Windows 8, or just use competing products that don't bloat the system to hell, it's going to end up with a lot of old Pentium 3-era systems being binned by people who don't know they can still keep this old hardware going and/or rely on Windows, so Windows XP will soon be dead unless Microsoft realise that there are still many XP machines running without any issues.
Pikachu, your signature says that you use RISC OS. Are you an old Acorn fan?
Because it doesn't suck. I loved XP.
_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I
gamefreak
Veteran

Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,119
Location: Citrus County, Florida
This is actually what I am talking about. While XP is having support cut off in less than a year (April 8th 2014) software vendors still support it. You can still get the latest antivirus, web browsing and other programs that run on XP.
Windows 98 was already having issues with vendor support prior to the 2006 discontinuation of 98 and Mistake Edition.
In 2003 my mother couldn't get ISP software to work with 95, which BTW the computers Department of Defense Educational Activity used still ran Win 95 or 98SE at the time. The school system didn't get its first 2000 or XP computers until the Fall of 2003. Even then not all the 95 and 98 systems were phased out.
Windows 95 and 98SE just worked around the time of discontinuation, especially if you didn't have powerful hardware. Like a system with less than a Pentium III and 384MB Ram. However that didn't stop software and hardware vendors for jumping ship with support. A lot of it was still prior to the 2006 discontinuation of 98 and ME by MS themselves. Microsoft and vendor discontinuation was probably the leading factor to why a lot of people ditched Pentium II era systems in 2006.
I loved XP and I loved 98 SE, two of the best OSe's MS released.
I think once MS stops all support for XP, a lot of people will simply go to Linux. People can't afford a new $700 laptop just to run Win 8 which is an OS that forces people to use their PCs like tablets. In fact, I've heard that MS is rolling back the attempt to force touch screen computing on everybody, and releasing Windows Blue which is like an "8.5" that allows for keyboard and mouse control. People are getting fed up with Microsoft's missteps and releasing buggy OSes onto the market. Microsoft users are constantly battling malware, and while Win 7/8 is better about fighting it many people are still forced to rely on aftermarket security products, many of which are weak and don't work properly. Many programmers already use Linux or MacOS X which is Linux based. I used to be on a computer technician forum, and much of the talk was how to keep people from switching to Linux which would put the virus removal industry out of business. People are fed up with Microsoft, that's all there is to it.